Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiForget Shorter Showers: Why Personal Change Does Not Equal Political Change
Would any sane person think dumpster diving would have stopped Hitler, or that composting would have ended slavery or brought about the eight-hour workday, or that chopping wood and carrying water would have gotten people out of Tsarist prisons, or that dancing naked around a fire would have helped put in place the Voting Rights Act of 1957 or the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Then why now, with all the world at stake, do so many people retreat into these entirely personal “solutions”?
Part of the problem is that we’ve been victims of a campaign of systematic misdirection. Consumer culture and the capitalist mindset have taught us to substitute acts of personal consumption (or enlightenment) for organized political resistance. An Inconvenient Truth helped raise consciousness about global warming. But did you notice that all of the solutions presented had to do with personal consumption—changing light bulbs, inflating tires, driving half as much—and had nothing to do with shifting power away from corporations, or stopping the growth economy that is destroying the planet? Even if every person in the United States did everything the movie suggested, U.S. carbon emissions would fall by only 22 percent. Scientific consensus is that emissions must be reduced by at least 75 percent worldwide.
Or let’s talk water. We so often hear that the world is running out of water. People are dying from lack of water. Rivers are dewatered from lack of water. Because of this we need to take shorter showers. See the disconnect? Because I take showers, I’m responsible for drawing down aquifers? Well, no. More than 90 percent of the water used by humans is used by agriculture and industry. The remaining 10 percent is split between municipalities and actual living breathing individual humans. Collectively, municipal golf courses use as much water as municipal human beings. People (both human people and fish people) aren’t dying because the world is running out of water. They’re dying because the water is being stolen.
Or let’s talk energy. Kirkpatrick Sale summarized it well: “For the past 15 years the story has been the same every year: individual consumption—residential, by private car, and so on—is never more than about a quarter of all consumption; the vast majority is commercial, industrial, corporate, by agribusiness and government [he forgot military]. So, even if we all took up cycling and wood stoves it would have a negligible impact on energy use, global warming and atmospheric pollution.”
Or let’s talk waste. In 2005, per-capita municipal waste production (basically everything that’s put out at the curb) in the U.S. was about 1,660 pounds. Let’s say you’re a die-hard simple-living activist, and you reduce this to zero. You recycle everything. You bring cloth bags shopping. You fix your toaster. Your toes poke out of old tennis shoes. You’re not done yet, though. Since municipal waste includes not just residential waste, but also waste from government offices and businesses, you march to those offices, waste reduction pamphlets in hand, and convince them to cut down on their waste enough to eliminate your share of it. Uh, I’ve got some bad news. Municipal waste accounts for only 3 percent of total waste production in the United States.
I want to be clear. I’m not saying we shouldn’t live simply. I live reasonably simply myself, but I don’t pretend that not buying much (or not driving much, or not having kids) is a powerful political act, or that it’s deeply revolutionary. It’s not. Personal change doesn’t equal social change.
So how, then, and especially with all the world at stake, have we come to accept these utterly insufficient responses? I think part of it is that we’re in a double bind. A double bind is where you’re given multiple options, but no matter what option you choose, you lose, and withdrawal is not an option. At this point, it should be pretty easy to recognize that every action involving the industrial economy is destructive (and we shouldn’t pretend that solar photovoltaics, for example, exempt us from this: they still require mining and transportation infrastructures at every point in the production processes; the same can be said for every other so-called green technology). So if we choose option one—if we avidly participate in the industrial economy—we may in the short term think we win because we may accumulate wealth, the marker of “success” in this culture. But we lose, because in doing so we give up our empathy, our animal humanity. And we really lose because industrial civilization is killing the planet, which means everyone loses. If we choose the “alternative” option of living more simply, thus causing less harm, but still not stopping the industrial economy from killing the planet, we may in the short term think we win because we get to feel pure, and we didn’t even have to give up all of our empathy (just enough to justify not stopping the horrors), but once again we really lose because industrial civilization is still killing the planet, which means everyone still loses. The third option, acting decisively to stop the industrial economy, is very scary for a number of reasons, including but not restricted to the fact that we’d lose some of the luxuries (like electricity) to which we’ve grown accustomed, and the fact that those in power might try to kill us if we seriously impede their ability to exploit the world—none of which alters the fact that it’s a better option than a dead planet. Any option is a better option than a dead planet.
Besides being ineffective at causing the sorts of changes necessary to stop this culture from killing the planet, there are at least four other problems with perceiving simple living as a political act (as opposed to living simply because that’s what you want to do). The first is that it’s predicated on the flawed notion that humans inevitably harm their landbase. Simple living as a political act consists solely of harm reduction, ignoring the fact that humans can help the Earth as well as harm it. We can rehabilitate streams, we can get rid of noxious invasives, we can remove dams, we can disrupt a political system tilted toward the rich as well as an extractive economic system, we can destroy the industrial economy that is destroying the real, physical world.
The second problem—and this is another big one—is that it incorrectly assigns blame to the individual (and most especially to individuals who are particularly powerless) instead of to those who actually wield power in this system and to the system itself. Kirkpatrick Sale again: “The whole individualist what-you-can-do-to-save-the-earth guilt trip is a myth. We, as individuals, are not creating the crises, and we can’t solve them.”
The third problem is that it accepts capitalism’s redefinition of us from citizens to consumers. By accepting this redefinition, we reduce our potential forms of resistance to consuming and not consuming. Citizens have a much wider range of available resistance tactics, including voting, not voting, running for office, pamphleting, boycotting, organizing, lobbying, protesting, and, when a government becomes destructive of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, we have the right to alter or abolish it.
The fourth problem is that the endpoint of the logic behind simple living as a political act is suicide. If every act within an industrial economy is destructive, and if we want to stop this destruction, and if we are unwilling (or unable) to question (much less destroy) the intellectual, moral, economic, and physical infrastructures that cause every act within an industrial economy to be destructive, then we can easily come to believe that we will cause the least destruction possible if we are dead.
The good news is that there are other options. We can follow the examples of brave activists who lived through the difficult times I mentioned—Nazi Germany, Tsarist Russia, antebellum United States—who did far more than manifest a form of moral purity; they actively opposed the injustices that surrounded them. We can follow the example of those who remembered that the role of an activist is not to navigate systems of oppressive power with as much integrity as possible, but rather to confront and take down those systems.
279 Comments so far
Show AllGood that Mr, Jensen points this out. I think that not too far down the line there is going to be an epidemic of disappointed anger on the part of all the good folks who have separated their trash, used fluorescent light bulbs, driven hybrids, shortened the length of their showers, and generally tried to live ecologically correct lives. They will be enraged and disappointed to discover that it hasn't made any difference when they were told it would.
The big corporations, with their "human energy; will you join us?" ads proclaiming themselves "part of the solution" will, in time, contribute to the anger when people begin to grasp that these institutions are trying to use marketing spin to persuade us that they're solving the problems when they aren't.
The only question is: Will the environment deteriorate fast enough so that people will be spending too much time and energy being ecological refugees, just trying to survive, to have time to be mad at how badly they are being scammed?
FDR's New Deal is another example of activism making a difference.
The hordes of unemployed people camped out in DC spurred FDR to action.
Until we see millions of unemployed people camping out in DC, Obama and Company won't act to improve economic conditions for anybody other than Wall Street and the Military Industrial Media Complex.
raydelcamino July 8th, 2009 10:45 am..Excellent idea...send the homeless to DC. Problem is, just like that bridge in NO, they'll be waiting "at the gates" to turn them away.
'They will be enraged and disappointed to discover that it hasn't made any difference when they were told it would.'
To the contrary, it's made a difference to those who have gotten off their asses and taken the time to do what they felt was right. It's what separates us from bitching whiners.
YES!Tony
"It's what separates us from bitching whiners."
- by giving you a false sense of accomplishment and moral superiority.
A false sense of accomplishment? Possibly, but it's better than throwing a pity party and bitching about why nobody showed.
Buy hey, at least my moral superiority isn't false.
I can't, for one minute, accept that watching how I treat this planet and living responsibly has little to zero impact.
If we stop buying what 'they' are selling, which inevitably means 'they' go out of business and stop polluting, doesn't that mean my personal life changes have a huge impact?
What is Jensen proposing anyway? It has been proven that nobody is listening to us. All we can do, unless it's time for revolution, is to stop buying what they're selling, stop voting for assholes, stop supporting half-measures like the Waxman bill, and to start living our own lives responsibly.
Is he saying there's nothing we can do? BULLSHIT!!!
I think he's saying that what we can do is a lot more than what we have been doing. Instead of not buying from corporations that exploit the planet, try to put them out of business, or better yet, make their business sector obsolete. Getting the country to switch to renewable energies would have far more impact on the degradation inflicted by coal mining than using less energy at home. The thing is, that is much, much harder, and much more dangerous to do.
I personally do try to shorten my showers, use less lightbulbs (why the hell does a fan come with 4 light bulb sockets? I only use 1 in there), unplug appliances when I leave home, I don't drive, etc. But I know there is so much more the entire country needs to do.
Jeevee
Very good, zmann. Al Gore has made it clear that each and every individual makes a difference!
"If we stop buying what 'they' are selling, which inevitably means 'they' go out of business and stop polluting, doesn't that mean my personal life changes have a huge impact?"
Nope, because there are still plenty of other consumers to go around and keep those corporations churning. Chiefly what your non-buying action accomplishes, and I believe this is what Jensen is saying, is drop-in-the-bucket feel-goodness.
The logical and moral fallacy behind "personal responsibility" is the assumption that a significant enough number of other people will act as you do, that these combined actions will halt the machine, and thus it is enough that we focus on personal choices rather than working to remake the system directly. Stopping the machine through consumer choice is a fantasy unless it is extremely highly coordinated.
Yes, we should not be pigs. But the kind of total-solution personal activism I frequently see touted - retreating to a farm, growing your own food, going solar, etc. - is also a way to fluff off the real, scary things that have to be done, which all involve confrontation with people and institutions in power.
We'd do much better using our energy taking on the power directly, rather than using all our energy hand-tilling fields and catching rainwater.
Not procreating is one of the few very effective personal actions we can take.
Confrontation, revolution....these are the next steps. Oh? And when you confront THEM? Don't take a shower first, don't take a shower for a week. Stink to high heaven!
Re yohocoma July 8th, 2009 10:46 am, who ends a thoughtful post with the following:
"Not procreating is one of the few very effective personal actions we can take."
Amen. It's the ultimate expression of disgust with the culture of consumerism and its attendant violence against all living things.
But your larger point, and the article's author's, seems to be that most other individual acts don't matter, and I respectfully but vehemently disagree.
For example, my voting for Cynthia McKinney had no apparent influence on the outcome. I expected none, although I hoped for her tally to be significant. It was simply a matter of expressing my preferences clearly, in the manner prescribed by my Constitution.
Much the same is true of my decisions to compost, to purchase a hybrid vehicle, to plant trees that I won't live to see reach their full height, and so on. I do these things, without looking over my shoulder to see if anybody's following, because I've judged them to be the right things for me to do.
All that being said, if you have any detailed plans for "taking on the power directly, rather than using all our energy hand-tilling fields and catching rainwater," I'd be very interested to hear them.
"Is he saying there's nothing we can do? BULLSHIT!!!"
My reaction is the same.
I see value in activism. However, if it does not emanate from one's own nose, if it does not stem from the way we live our lives, then we are merely being hypocrites.
This is not, nor is it ever, an "either/or" situation. It is an "all" situation where we must be activists both within our skins and in the streets and even in the halls of power.
Those who sit on one side or the other and point fingers and rage do nothing to move anything one bit closer to a positive outcome.
I believe it was the Quakers who came out with the phrase: "Pray, but move your feet." We must do both - neither one by itself is effective.
Don't listen to the man - take shorter showers! Then, move your feet!!
"Is he saying there's nothing we can do? BULLSHIT!!!"
That's not what he's saying. Read some more Jensen or listen to him talk sometime. He comes as close to publicly advocating forceful / violent / armed destruction of the industrial state as you can come without being dead, in prison or in hiding. In this case, I think he came as close as you can come and still have your article published in Orion.
He wants folks to take some serious risks on behalf of the planet.
I think we should, and many of us will take some serious risks, however, we must change from the inside out. Demanding that the industrial state morph into a green eco-state while being pigs ourselves will not get us what we want.
Agreed. Brother Jensen is doing his level best to make us aware of where our options lie. Direct action against this killing machine of a culture is the only workable option. Anything else tends toward dissipation and a false sense of accomplishment where there isn't any. Besides, what good is it for you to live simply and sustainably when there are literally billions of your compatriots who can not? I cannot be free, until we all are. I cannot be at peace until my brothers can be at peace.
If you really want to understand what he means, check out Endgame Vols. 1 & 2. Seriously folks, if you want to keep indulging in the goodies given to those loyal to this culture, then stop posturing and accept that. If you really want to do something of effect, living simply is merely the smallest start.
The point is that your individual sacrifice will never be joined by sacrifice from people who don't share your social and ideological mores; and that will never be enough. Some idiot always wants to drive his SUV no matter that his neighbors all have Prius.
Historic atmospheric CO2 levels were 280 ppm. We currently have over 380 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere and climbing. CO2 releases prompt methane releases from the Canadian and Siberian permafrost which will exceed all the carbon released by human action. Simply burning LESS fossil fuels is not enough. We have to burn NONE, as in zero.
Then we have to come up with a means, possibly biochar, of sequestering carbon already in the atmosphere without causing more damage than is already done. This would require massive, global, government action and resets of priorities. Until that happens all we are doing is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
If you look very closely, the environmentalists in the US are talking about carbon dioxide as the big problem. Almost no one mentions animal agriculture. The real inconvenient truth is that carbon dioxide is not the main cause of global warming. The main cause of global warming is animal agriculture.
The fact that animal agriculture is the main cause of global warming has been scientifically proven by Dr. James Hansen, who is head of the global warming research for NASA, and is the grandfather of global warming research. According to him, carbon dioxide is 9% of the problem— at best. According to Dr. Hansen, the aerosols that are released with some of the sources of carbon dioxide help to nullify even that 9%. That is an impressive statement.
The truth is you can do all your improvements with electricity, use as many Prius cars as possible and go as green as you want , but you really aren’t going to make much difference in terms of global warming (weather instability), because carbon dioxide isn’t really the big problem. The big problem is methane.
Methane accounts for about 50% of global warming. What’s really important here is that carbon dioxide takes between 100 and 10,000 years to get out of the atmosphere. Methane takes 9 to 15 years to get out of the atmosphere. That means that if everyone went vegan now, we’d have the opportunity to bring global warming to a halt—almost immediately.
Methane comes 85% from cows burping and farting; this is a problem because there’s a lot of cows on the planet. The cows take up 70 percent of the arable land (that means agricultural land) and 30 % of the land mass that is being used on the planet. They use nearly 70 percent of the potable water. That’s huge. The excretion of the cows is 130 times more than the human excretion on the planet.
The cows produce a billion pounds of manure a year in the United States. That manure gives off not only methane, but nitrous oxide, which has about 300 times more global warming potential than carbon dioxide. This billion pounds of manure produces 65% of the nitrous oxide in the US.
Methane and nitrous oxide are the major global warming gases. There is one more; it’s called ammonia. Ammonia is given off a lot by the manure and also by the animal sewage lagoons. Ammonia has more to do with what we’ll call acid rain, which causes another set of global problems. They all work together to toxify the planet.
Everybody’s life is at stake on the planet. We’ve got to get to understand what we’re talking about. Are we willing to go out of our comfort zone of our economic and dietary excesses to do this?
We have to look at the fact that since the 1950’s, in the U.S., meat-eating has increased by 54 pounds pounds per person. The average person in the United States eats 230 pounds of meat per year. In Africa it’s 30 pounds per year. The average around the world is 90 pounds per year. China has increased its meat consumption since 1950 by 15 times. And what is the impact of that? The result of this increase is that China has become a grain importer since 1970, rather than an exporter.
If everyone decides to go vegan then the global warming shell game is over. Starvation is over. The destruction of the water supply is over. Since everyone doesn't decide to go vegan, you can start with yourself. Then, if you want to take your activism locally and globally, do whatever you must to get people go vegan.
If everyone decides to go vegan then the global warming game is over.
If everyone decides to go vergin then the global warming game is over.
AND a more humane way of life cannot help but result.
When the sentient source of your food is tortured to death how can that not have an impact on you?
If you can't see something this simple and obvious nobody can explain it to you.
No, the entire earth going vegan, would eliminate about 18 percent of the gases forcing global warming - a big step in the right direction, but we need to eliminate 75 percent of these gases.
Mr. Jensen also should have said something about this "one-answer" fanaticism that is an oh-so USAn phenomenon. Veganism, permaculture, the "atmospheric vortex engine" etc...
And you you aren't going to stop humans from eating all meat, much less eggs and dairy products, which are a needed source of protien for most people if one does eschew meat. The pure "vegan" diet is a phenomenon of US fad-diet culture, and is completely impractical in much of the world. Come to think of it, most devout vegans I meet in look pretty unhealthy to me. The rest occasionally "cheat". Even the most devout Hindus or Jains aren't vegan.
'One answer' solution(s):
The simplest one answer (and why doesn't anybody promote it more?), since it is soooo obvious, is to kill all humans.
The seoond simplest one answer is to kill the corporations.
Frankly, I prefer the second one answer.
nedlud
"Mr. Jensen also should have said something about this "one-answer" fanaticism that is an oh-so USAn phenomenon. Veganism, permaculture, the "atmospheric vortex engine" etc..."
You're right, there is no one answer. There are millions of answers.
Permaculture is comprehensive. Have you looked at it? The point your are trying to make, and perhaps Jensen's point too, is that USans have to embrace permaculture. Maybe you can rewrite your entire comment.
virgin
Good luck getting the entire world population to stop eating meat, which is natural, and a part of probably every culture in every region of the world.
I may be less of a meat eater but as one who used to enjoy visiting the farmlands so much and eventually learned the sad and painful truth about the demise of small farms over the decades, I still respect the meat eaters. In fact, since most vegans food comes from overprocessing while pasture raised meat and diary do not guzzle up that much fossi fuels and water, it's hard to tell who to side with. Cornfed animals are the issue. Before factory farming was pushed into overtaking small farms and smashing them, people would get their local produce from these farms and ranches in addition to a local farmer's market. Today, so much plastic is wasted on wrapping up all these overprocessed junk foods which themselves guzzle more fossil fuel and water compared to locally grown food. There's so much to explain on this matter but to sum it up, it's not the meat vs vegetarian issue alone but the way food is processed that's the major problem.
Jennifer:
I agree with all of your points. The meat I eat and the milk I drink come from a pasture that is less than 25 miles from where I live. I sometimes shop at a co-op that does not sell meat and am amazed to see the vegan junk food -- sugary, obesity-causing foods like cupcakes, and processed vegan foods that have been shipped in from 3,000 miles away that are marketed as "healthy." Some vegan food is healthy, and I don't deny that. But the whole vegan vs. meat-eater argument often seems oversimplified to me. Food issues are pretty complex.
It seems part of the vegan movement is to get as many people as possible to switch away from animal products, by showing anything can be made of all-plant ingredients. Of course, many food 'products' are not healthy in the least, animal-free or no.
Food issues can be complex but not so much if you are eating a reasonable variety of uncooked, organic vegetables and fruits, nuts and seeds, and spend a few minutes a day in the sun. In that case you will get all of the protein, all of the calcium and all of the other nutrients you need. On the other hand, if you know the farmer and know that the meat and dairy you are consuming is organic, then you are probably free of most of the pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, hormones, growth stimulants, insecticides, tranquilizers, radioactive isotopes, antibiotics and other assorted drugs and colorants that are in your local market meat and dairy.
However, even if the meat and dairy you consume are organic, what you are getting is too much unusable, coagulated or chemically bonded calcium, and protein imbalance which clogs the basement membrane between your capillaries and your cells. In other words, a protein storage disease. Nutrients and oxygen are not passing properly into your cells and waste products are not properly eliminated. You are also getting lots of lovely amyloid deposits, a bi-product of animal protein metabolism which causes tissue and organ degeneration, a major factor in premature aging among other negatives. You are also getting an exciting phosphorous imbalance which pulls the calcium out of your bones to buffer the acidity, and not vice versa. This doesn't eventually lead to a loss of bone density, it is a loss of bone density. Animal protein intake results in a negative calcium balance. If you are lucky and also eating lots of green leafy vegetables, your depletion may be temporarily offset.
If your milk is pasteurized, that process destroys the lipase, phosphatase and amylase enzymes that your body needs to properly digest it, and assimilate the minerals, including the calcium. It also leads to long term digestive track weakening that you may never feel. Similarly, if you cook your meat, that destroys the lipase enzymes in the meat too, and changes the fatty acids from "cis" to a "trans" configuration which further blocks the respiration function of the cell membranes. The metabolic combustion of animal protein in your body creates an overly acidic system because of the accumulation of toxic protein metabolic wastes such as uric acid, purines and ammonia.
The need for high protein and animal based calcium is an old myth based on fear not fact. Most green leafy vegetables have a far higher concentrations of usable protein with all 8 of the essential amino acids, and calcium, and other vitamins, enzymes minerals and phytonutrients than do meat and dairy, and they come without all of the heart-clogging and toxic sludge baggage. And that is before the meat is cooked and the milk is pasteurized. After that, their nutritional value plummets by more than 50 percent and their enzymes drop to zero.
The diseases caused, triggered and exacerbated by the consumption of meat and dairy are legion and well-known, from heart disease to several forms of cancer, to osteoporosis, to diabetes, etc. Don't let your zeal to defend your consumption pattern miss out on the fact that the casein in dairy( which is the main ingredient of Elmer's glue) is 300 percent higher that mother's milk and contains strong opiods that merely feed your addiction. Kick it for a few weeks then read the tremendous, mounting evidence from several major studies (many cited in the Journal of Clinical Nutrition and the Medical Tribune) that the single most important dietary change a woman can make to prevent osteoporosis is to decrease the amount of protein in the diet. The other factor is to eliminate all animal calcium and eat organic plant-based calcium sources (such as kale, collards, mustard greens, broccoli and cabbage) which are low in oxalates and therfore properly absorbed by your body.
"Everybody’s life is at stake on the planet." I think it would be wise to start to replace "life" with "body" in statements like this. It is the form of life we all reside in that is limited. Life it's self is unlimited and eternal. We perceive we are the body because we have forgotten to perceive the life that animates it. Truly this body is challenged by our beliefs and actions today but our life is what can transcend these challenges and that life is not threatened at all. As we draw up the life force in our body and transcend to a balanced place of living, we become aware of how to live instead of focusing on how we will die.
Wow, Leea, that is profound, insightful and thought-provoking. Very deep thinking. I especially like your last sentence. Reminds me of a line in a Bob Dylan song where he says, "he who is not busy being born is busy dying".
This morning I had a funeral to go to. One of my mom's friends died from Cancer. I should have gone, but then all kinds of "living" needed to be done. So instead of spending 2 hours in the car driving to and from a funeral, I helped feed some hungry folks and worked on a grape arbor.
Life is for living. Live it up!
Gracias Moondoogy, we are one in this and all, ;)
Awesome, JHC. Thanks for sharing those sobering stats! I went vegan in January 1, 2000. Except for the occasional local free-range organically and naturally fad chicken egg. We need to quit eating belching, farting grain-fed bovines and other farm raised animals.
Farmers, take note: Grow hemp and... actually grow a lot of different things. Abandon livestock farming and monoculture. Abandon agrochemicals and disking.
Permaculture and vegetarianism will heal our beleaguered atmosphere and put us on the path to sustainability.
"Burp, fart!" Oh, whoops, pardon me.
Not a meat eater but learned something here.Tony
There are 200 millon Cattle in India. This in addition to 90 million buffalo. This is aboout three times the total in the US and Canada in an area about 1/7th the land mass.
The 100 million or so cattle in North America replaced a herd of North American Bison that roamed the plains for thousands of years that had a population of 70 million at the high end. These bison about 30 percent larger mass then modern cattle.
Now India eats a FRACTION of the meat we do in North America and in fact beef consumption has not increased through measurable history.
Yet they have around 3x the number of cattle.
I am suggesting that the increase in GHG emissions has less to do with the total number of Ruminants then it does with the industrialization of agriculture.
I don't understand targeting the folks who are taking shorter showers and living simple lives as the ones who should be taking more potent political stances. It's a responsibility of us all to get off our asses and do something. And we are all falling short...way short. A more appropriate reprimand would be to get from out of the front of the TV, off our cells and computers and to march to the hell hole of DC and demand the whole damn government resign due to incompetence, greed, criminality, corruption and NON-REPRESENTATION. Now we're talking!
"I don't understand targeting the folks who are taking shorter showers and living simple lives as the ones who should be taking more potent political stances."
Because we're the ones who give a damn.
zmann July 8th, 2009 9:43 am...My point being that "we" will never be enough. The idea is to get folks involved who are in the grip of the lies and deception. Then we will have the numbers we need to make an impact.
Good point. So do we get those folks involved, or is it up to someone else?
zmann July 8th, 2009 9:55 am...........Personally, I am in a difficult position, financially and caretaking wise, but I do my best by handing out pertinent info and DVDs in my area....VERY conservative/Evangelical North Central Florida. Uphill battle all the way.
Sorry to hear buddy. I;'m from South Florida myself, but went to USF in Tampa for 2 years. But yeah, Florida is pretty religiously conservative outside the big cities.
And hey, that's a good way to go. That's what I did while at college, sharing information I came across that pushed progressive messages, or simply countered the wrong actions our country was taking. Netflix is a great source for documentaries...it was tough at school to get a place to show them to other students because of all the red tape involved in using school space, but hell, my dorm room had to work from time to time.
zmann July 8th, 2009 10:22 am... Came from S. Florida myself....Boynton Beach....Netflix keeps you from duplicating. I get most of my DVDs from Tom at the 911dvdproject.com...more than just 9/11 DVDs, although that's the area in which I concentrate.
All you can do is present them with the info. They will listen or not. AND, politics in this area is rarely discussed...like it's a secret or a taboo subject. Maybe it's just resignation...have yet to figure it out...just not here long enough, I guess.
zmann. Thanks for giving a damn, man. You're cool.
And you're the standard for us to live up to on here :-)
Trying to tell us that we are the problem is a necessary diversion if corporations are to be allowed to do as they please.
No magic trick can work unless the audience believes what is not true, and is watching carefully (so as not to be fooled) what they have been told to watch.
Corporations are not only not individuals, they are a mindless, growing, destructive entity that cannot rest until they own everything. Then they will fight each other until only one corporation is left, but by then there won't be a planet left either.
This economic meltdown is an opportunity to break the monster into smaller, manageable pieces.
Sioux Rose
Jensen makes a great case. We are so accustomed to linear equations. As a result, we sometimes fail to realize that there is a place for everyone, and thus a number of solutions and approaches at the proverbial table.
It IS important that some persons act as wayshowers/role models to forms of living that go more gently on this amazing earth. Moondoggy, you are such a one.
It IS important that citizens/consumers recognize that every time they buy a big mac, they contribute to the "meat market." The first poster makes a compelling case for what this dietary predilection means for global ecology. (I happen to think that eating meat also contributes to macho personality traits and the over-all ridiculously inflated US emphasis on Mars, war, aggression, in general.)
Jensen makes an important case, critical really, that the individual can only do so much via lifestyle alterations. A lot of would-be activists dilute their passion by diverting the call to change ONLY to their own neck of the woods. To me this is similar to the New Age movement that co-opted much political activism in general by diverting persons to the task of "self work," the quintessential inside job. I often argue that it must be both! The individual owns an obligation to evolve at his or her own rate, but so, too, must citizens contribute to the overall evolution of the society they share. It is not an either/or proposition.
One hidden factor of the "Mars rules" bankrupt ethos that is so prevalent in our land of the hardly brave is the focus on SELF. We see it in consumerism, that TV commercials market to the "single digit consumer," to increase sales/market shares. It is also seen in the "YOY" economic priorities, in the conservative belief that everyone is responsible for himself; and in its most raw form, as competition, the sporting arena, and its acme, the killing fields a/k/a "theaters" of war.
As scarcity begins persons will by necessity find themselves forced to learn how to work better together. Community will emerge from the ashes. Truly we are coming into a phase where we either learn to care for one another, or may otherwise perish. An armed nation with lots of persons angry, hungry and/or homeless (added to those who cannot get humane treatment for medical needs) can be a land more dangerous than any scene drawn from an apocalyptic film.
When you said linear equations, you reminded me of why most of us find calculus so difficult in high school and college. If the young minds were allowed to actually think dynamically and allowed self-development, even the most complicated equations wouldn't look so difficult.
You nailed it on the next to the last paragraph. I think that this SELF mentality is forced upon children at very young ages. No one is taught Basic Interpersonal Communications Skills and this makes it too easy for one bully kid to step in and corrupt the other kids. If that's not enough, the adults in charge who have grown up with the individualist mentality will do almost anything to try to force children to be selfish and even be proud of it even if it involves physical abuse. I was lucky that my parents weren't that way although they used to nag a lot about me not being like everyone else and being too nice and caring. I was also lucky, come to think of it, that I got rejected for not getting too materialistic about things even though I used to get hooked into junk food and would sometimes eat like mad when depressed but later overcame that madness.
When you become resistant and even immune to greed, materialism, selfishness, warmongering, and the likes, at first it can be difficult to mingle in the crowd and relate to those who are your friends but don't share that view. The tricky part is getting others to accept that. Maybe there's a good book on counter-seduction?
i'd imagine we're headed into a time of aa groups that deal in (borrowing from chellis glendinning) recovery from 'western civilization' or some such thing... truly, having grown up incarcerated, our imaginations lobotomized and attention constantly shifted for us from subject to subject by means of bells (in schools) or media manipulation in asphalted-over places once teeming with life, with homogenous groups of same age/class/ethnicity for the most part, overcoming the accepted paradigm of compliance/conformity/competition and image-consciousness (as opposed to just consciousness) we in the 'developed' world are at the low low end of a big big learning curve toward a realism that is genuinely respectful/aligned with the earth, our home. much has been done to disconnect us from our essential roots and much needs to be done to reconnect as a species so as to have the wherewithal to employ ourselves usefully for the sake of each other and our glorious planet (as opposed to a paycheck's admission into the theatrical, commodified world that money can buy)... actually i've no idea how to talk about this, but suspect we have a great deal to learn from other species and natural phenomena in this respect.... mycelium, bees, penguins, polar bears, cauliflowers, nettles, earthworms, linden trees.... rivers, rocks, weather... whatever's around. and each other, especially those from whom we believe ourselves to be most alienated. just a guess. globalization/privatization has tricked us into thinking that enormous systems can and do determine the trajectory of our lives. hyperindividualism tells us we wield a 'free will' and can be masters of our own fate. neither and both have 'true' arguments. communitarianism is the frontier of our time, i think, given the way things are shaking down to require of us the development of a whole lot more interpersonal skills to reframe our perceptions from the 'ownership society' ethos to an 'our part in the great web of being' ethos. the older i get the less i worry about seducing or counter-seducing & the more i am seduced (and humbled) by this mystery school called life, really.
I would say that physically or mentally, we've all grown up incarcerated one way or another. Now that you mentioned ownership society, my favorite characteristic of the Native Indians is how they viewed land. Instead of all this private ownership poop, people actually got together and took land collectively. I've even studied a few ways they were frugal. I look forward to actually going and meeting the tribes out in the Dakotas and Montana. I might even stumble across one of my favorites on this site, Moondoggy. God, when I look back at history and realize the extent to which old Europe committed this atrocity of wiping out the Natives first with their careless spreading of diseases followed by violence through misunderstanding the natives along with playing divide and conquer, I realize that God punished and laid a curse on this nation for generations to come. Maybe when our country dies for good will the curse be relieved. I just hope I'm not alive to see it by the time it happens. Still, I believe that it's not too late to reframe the definitions of "ownership" and set things right again although we'll have to do this in spite of the cornfed and utterly ignorant masses. Good luck to us all.
Hi Jennifer. You don't have to stumble across me. You are a welcome guest of honor here. Mi casa es su casa! ~Moondoggy
Thanks Moondoggy. :)
Sioux Rose
MATAGAN: You are a deep thinker. Good post. It always intrigued me how the West (mecca of rabid consumerism without conscience) pushed the idea of freedom and/or free will, while belief systems in the East see the workings of fate & karma. I maintain it is not an either/or proposition. Certain aspects of life are fated, and yet there is room for some zones of free choice. I think the new civilization that will emerge from the ashes of the spent (like oil/goal/nuclear fuel rods) past will recognize that life's quality and character reflects elements of both.
"I often argue that it must be both! The individual owns an obligation to evolve at his or her own rate, but so, too, must citizens contribute to the overall evolution of the society they share. It is not an either/or proposition."
Agreed, Sioux Rose, however, I find the tenor of Jensen's piece to be a bit condescending to those who are doing the hard work of simple living. They are not doing it only for themselves, but to show us a potential for how we may live in the future.
You're right - it must be both! I just wish we could get to both without alienating one another in the process. Activism is necessary. Veganism is necessary. Permaculture is necessary. Organic food and meat is necessary. Starving the beast is necessary. Voting for Nader is necessary. Holding Obama's feet to the fire is necessary. And doing whatever we can to improve ourselves is necessary. So, let's get on with it and help each other out instead of further delineating the world with self-made barriers.
Finally, I wholly agree with your last paragraph. That is why it is essential that we build community, right now, starting from ourselves outward. Let's reach out. And when we do so, let's do it with an open hand, not an accusatory finger.
Sioux Rose
TED, sweet heart, do you think I have been kidding when I have perhaps too often related that "Mars rules?" It is to our value system what cancer is to the body. Everyone has been taught for too long that it's "me or you." Thus many find themselves on the defensive as they search for ways to portray a different way of living. ALL of these brave incursions into "other" are important. Nature may send out 1000 seeds and not every one will manage to grow in viable soil; but that hardly means the efforts of all those seeds are wasted. I love the circle/Zodiac because it is possibly the only LIVING model that shows equality within a context that supports not just one right way, rather MANY! And each contributes to the health and viability of the whole. Some people are intended to plant gardens, others to write music. A few are intended to go to the front lines and wave red flags at the authoritarian bulls. It is impossible to know how all of these actions can or might coalesce to bring about the change we ALL are hoping for, investing in. Perhaps we would not be here, not posting in this progressive forum, seeking others who like ourselves sense that too much has gone wrong, if we did not believe in a form of deliverance. Our search for something else IS part of the healing process.
I liked this article because having been on the spiritual path since my teen years I've watched persons' quest for higher answers turned towards material comfort instead, as if this diversion constituted the acme of inner development. I've watched the movement get co-opted, and now Mammon and Mars have over-reached themselves. Blatantly turning fiscal systems into numerological fictions, and sane mores on their collective arses, it is both painful AND cathartic to observe as the reality we all invested in comes asunder. Necessity is the mother of invention. Experimental approaches are not only welcome, they are nature and spirit's way of ensuring some continuity of the human race!
Indeed, dear. :-D
Sure sure, just you can say it all in one word: permaculture. Something interesting is that if Jensen were himself practicing a simple lifestyle he could not possibly criticize it because when someone practices it, one knows it's right. It puts us into contact with our real nature. Jensen acts like he's on the DLC/AIPAC payroll, maybe even AEI.
Any change requires a base of support. Those who have an awareness of the issues will also be the ones who make some personal response to the concerns. Making a personal response begins the process of engagement. As Mr. Jensen points out, the asymmetry of a personal action to the collective action of a corporation, an army or a society mutes individual action, but the asymmetry also mutes the activist's action. Both a base of belief and understanding and an activist community are required for the changes he envisions. A more complete argument is here: http://keyecommentary.blogspot.com/
The question remains. When will polluting corporations and government entities (TVA for example) be called upon to make sacrifices for the sake of life on earth?
Oh? You mean posting on Common Dreams won't change the world? Come on, no fair, I eat Tofu and don't like corporations.....Being here in cyberspace, it makes me feel good, will that help save a life in Pakistan?
No. Not one.
And neither has ANY vote cast, not ANY vote for ANYONE.
Cold showers don't stop global warming.
And NO vote, NO vote stops the corporations.
Short showers and Voting are Illusions.
Would the system allow a mechanism to be in place that threatened it?
Every one of your points is astute and irrefutable from a rational point of view, but I'm with Sioux Rose that consciousness has an impact in ways that we don't fully understand.
Stupidness also, has an impact in ways, we don't, fully, understand.
Neitzsche, it is to the next step in real time,
Sioux Rose impacts our consciousness, here on CD, in ways that we don't fully understand but know are All Good. Love is really spelled t-i-m-e, and SR, takes her time and shares her heart with us. CD has a soul woven from threads, She is much of it. with humility, joe
Sioux Rose
AZJOE: You have been quite poetic lately in how you lend ENORMOUSLY generous support to persons in this forum. Thank you for your kind words today. I drove to the Florida Keys (8 hot hours) on Sunday, as this is where I have a loyal clientele. I've been working 10-7 since... not much time to post. Once again, I appreciate your "vote" of confidence. When I am not working (or privileged to take breaks from writing projects), CD is my favored place to "hang out," as it is a true, if virtual community.
Sioux Rose, salutations! be safe traveling, w/o travailing, and avoid ending verbs with ing, it weakens our writing I got learned.
WHAT, a moon she is has been this cycle
"Oh? You mean posting on Common Dreams won't change the world?"
It sure as hell changed me, and for far better I think.
"It sure as hell changed me, and for far better I think."
I think you're reinforcing Jensen's point. Personal change isn't going to save the planet.
Right. But maybe any one of us could? Isn't that sort of the hope so many here put into Nader?
Good point, zmann.
Isn't the hope that we can make a difference in this life what keeps us all from blowing our brains out?
If we lose hope, we're dead. Even if we're walking and posting, without hope, we're already dead.
I don't think Nader went overboard on using the word hope unlike Obama. Those who voted for Nader knew what to expect of him. It's a shame that those who voted for Obama had no idea on what to expect of him. For some, he looks like one who's filling expectations but for others and even those who had no expectations, it's been more minus than plus to show for it. Telling voters to hope and then betraying them is generally bad practice. Obama hasn't always done this but where it counts, this could prove to be a liability against him.
You gotta look at the gang O'Bamba runs with. If Nader were a Demok, he'd be a lost vote too.
"It sure as hell changed me, and for far better I think."
Same here. And I still get the feeling that there's more to learn so I'll admit I'm hooked to this site. :)
Me too, it's my antidote for work. Even though I probably shouldn't post on here during work.
fuck work, keep posting!
Haha, I will :-).
zmann, that's ok. Besides, when work bullies you into watching Rush Limbaugh, a little bootkicking back and choosing your preference can't hurt. And if they throw you out for posting here, then may they fail. :)
LOL, they won't kick me out for it. It's just not very 'professional' to do stuff like this on work time. But we're not corporate drones here. Where else will someone bring in home-baked oatmeal cookies baked with hemp flour for the entire office to share? For sure as hell, not at any corporation. This place is the best, I'd love to stay here forever.
Ah yes, that's true. I'll admit that now that I'm working remotely from home, I feel at ease when I post since I have one computer that's for home use and another for work when I need it.
You made my stomach growl in hunger with those oatmeal hemp cookies. I've eaten oatmeal cookies and have drunk milk with hemp protein powder but never taken oatmeal hemp cookies. Now I'm hungry ! :)
Come up to DC, and next time he brings them in I'll save some for you :-). All his baked goods are vegan, too. Bread loaves, muffins, etc. I miss baking.
Jennifer~
There is a little boat and a big boat in Buddhist teachings. In the little boat, you strive to save yourself. In the big boat, you strive to save everyone (which would include yourself).
I think cowards choose the little boat. Maybe they still achieve enlightenment. But maybe that 'enlightenment' is a bathtub version, when they could have chosen the ocean.
I like the big boat because I don't feel left out. Sure, it can feel fun at first going in the little boat but even the most selfish can't resist that sad and lonely feeling lingering. Not everyone can be the same but some will finally shift to the big boat while a few will think they're big shots and settle for the little boat of instability only to find themselves begging to come back when a leak springs in their little boat and no one can help the individual.
Hmmm...interesting.
A koan:
A Buddhist is born in a little boat
She wants to be in a big boat
How does the Buddhist get to the big boat?
Another koan:
Life is diversity
Each member a little boat
Can we not link arms, and in so doing
Become a big boat
And still preserve diversity?
There is a 12-step program to quit CD, Jennifer, but it isn't pretty.
Step 1: Drill a 3/8 inch hole in the middle of your computer.
Step 2: Skip the rest of the steps...you're done.
Um, you can try that on your PC first. In the mean time, I have no intention of quitting CD. This is the best progressive/liberal site unlike most others on the net which are rife with cornfed Obamabots. Plus there's plenty of deep thinking posts that kind of correspond to what I'm reading out there. Some posts can be abstract but they do get easy to understand after a while. :)
I was joking, Jennifer. It's something I've considered myself.
I'm sorry if you were offended by my attempt at humah. Please don't quit CD.
Signed,
Lobsterfed Obamabot
Oh ok, thanks Ted. You're cool. :)
PS: You're no Obamabot. Trust me. I stumbled across them yesterday on Huffpost and Alternet under the Palin bashing articles, not that I support Palin at all. It is true that we can't be constantly too worried about the pols. Oh, still more catching up on training myself there on that to go. :)
Dude, if you have nothing nice to say, then don't say anything at all. That advice of yours was uncalled for.
Generally Ted isn't rude with Jen. They have had a debate on Obama on whatever the failure on an issue but other than that, they usually get along just fine. Ted voted Obama while Jen voted Nader. They have also disagreed on how to get politicians to pay attention. Jen usually thinks that voting and some moderate participation will do while Ted says all out in addition to voting. There's room for debate there. Generally, they're courteous to each other.
I do, however, agree that telling Jen to drill a hole in the middle of her computer is very rude and uncalled for even if it was a joke. I believe that he should apologize but I'll leave him to make the call. Who flagged your comment by the way?
Well, that's why I've never tried my hand at stand-up comedy.
I didn't flag anyone's comments. Don't know why anyone would.
I thought Ted's 12 step program sounded pretty funny, drilling a 3/8 inch hole in the middle of your computer. I've pondered the issue of CD addiction and wondered if I'm falling into it myself. Oh my!
My wife thinks I'm "married to this computer" at night when she goes to bed at 10 and I'm up til midnight. I tell her I'm going to night school. I just don't have to drive to campus, don't have to pay tuition, can study whatever I want to, when I want to and don't have to take any tests. That answer seems somewhat satisfactory.
But as for the CD addiction, I've contemplated committing computercide, but then I'd have to quit night school and I'd miss all my faceless friends with funny nicknames; the Obamabots, the Nadarites, even the Palinites and the Ron Paulers... and even the occasional poser from the payrolls of Uncle Scam and the mighty Corporatocracy.
Love and peace to you all. We're all in this boat together. And you know what they say? "Global Warming lifts all boats." Cheers!
Dennis, he's ok. He's one of the good guys and he's no Obamabot. Trust me. See my response to Ted. He does actually mean well in some ways. I have to admit that even when it's so easy to get upset with Obama even as he worsens, the other side of me fights back and tells me to calm down and lighten up. I find one thing that works is reminding myself of "Charlie's Angels" to get over that powerless feeling. :)
zmann, it changed me too, and has for a decade-you zmann helped me grow, you know of what I speak perhaps-and I love our family dearly brother,
My point, one I am coming to and disliking as a truth, is that we are all disempowered utterly by The Machine, CD is a pocket of sanity in an unstoppable tsunami of corporate rape. That will get worse no matter our actions until The Revolution.
A year ago I had some hope that before the Revolution, things might get better-I knew better, Marx would have laughed in my face.
We should seek to educate ourselves and others. And be kind. We see things from many pov's though we look out from the same sinking ship. Some see the ice, some see life rafts, some of us the stars. But the US is following Marx's projections/blueprint on it's path to Violent Revolution To. A. T!
takecarezmann, always humbly, joe.
Maaaan, where have I been? There are some pretty heady posts here. I've had my head in the clouds (literally as I was up snow skiing in Glacier National Park). There's some cool shit being passed around here. You people rock! Keep up the juicy dialog!
I think CD had helped us all to grow in ways we never expected. I love this community, and I love you people! You included azjoe, you crazy fuck! High five man!
Moondoggy, Moondoggy-That would be psychotic mothereffer to you my sanguine friend.
Moondoggy, degrees of commitment...shorter showers mean nothing. Americans need to STOP showering. And eating. THAT would help global warming. But, but, why do I feel the planet would declare a Universal Holiday in this event?
Md...do you ever ski naked on LSD? I did that with a friend at Mammoth until he disappeared into some dapples of light. Forever.
Yeah, I skied naked on July 4th, 2003 on Saint Paul Peak in Montana's Cabinet Mountains with a girl friend of mine. We weren't tripping on LSD, but we were pretty high nonetheless.
Americans don't need to stop showering, but certainly stop eating. And please forgo the cologne, aftershave, perfume, fabric softener and scented lotion. Americans could also watch a lot less TV, get more exercise and eat a ton less food. I've never seen so many fat people as there is in today's society! Holy cow!
When I was in school a fat person really stood out in a crowd. Nowadays it's almost abnormal to see someone who isn't a walking whale! The American public is beginning to resemble feedlot, corn-fed, hormone injected beef. "Mooooooooooove!"
Jesus people, have a little self control!
""If voting could change the system, it would be illegal.""
— Theodore Adorno
"If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal. "
— Emma Goldman
"Fuck voting!"
––George Carlin
There is no crisis point at which the public will suddenly become aware that the elite have gone too far. If they can delude the public now, they can do so indefinitely. The key to saving the planet lies through class awareness and class resistance as the prologue to establishing a truly scientific approach to economy in which it is recognized that no profits have ever been created, rather a deficit has been created that victimizes most but benefits a few who are able to use this benefit to compel government to behave as they require.
Excellent article.
But one point that Mr. Jensen missed is debunking the notion of "lifestyle proselitization" - that when we choose to live simply, and use lower-impact means of transportation, not eat meat, etc. is that, by example, others will follow.
I've done it all. I chose a city neighborhood wher I didn't need a car for routine chores, chose a downtown job so I could always use the bus to get to work even if I work late, rarey use air conditioners, keep the thermostat low in winter. And I made sure to talk about these choices in conversations. When my job moved to an outer suburb, I moved out too so my commute would be not much more than 5 mi. With walking and the bus less of an option, I bought a couple chinese electric motor scooters and modified them, including changing to lithium cells, in order to get suitable performance. They get the energy-equivalence of about 400 mpg. I even printed up info sheets becaise I thought interested people would be asking me everywhere about the electric scooter.
So, after all of this, did I convert a single person? Not a single one. Here in CD, I recieve frequent rebuttals to my advicacy of an urban lifestyle as the most important carbon redusing step most people can take. Hardly anyone asks about the electric motor scooters - even when it was parked at "green" venues like the food co-op. It the suburbs, I face occasional mocking, and derisive shouting (even thrown eggs once) while riding the scooters.
So, I have learned from personal experience that lifestyle-proselitization doesn't work. We aren't going to change anything unless we change the institutions. This means replacing the current oligharchy with an activist government with eloquent populist spokespersons attacking the system head on, passing tough laws and programs to disable and gradually dismantle the system. Yes, this is a pipe dream here in the US, although there are examples such as Venezuela.
Interesting comments, pjd.
I wonder: Who did you make the changes in your life for? What did you expect others to do? How can you be sure you haven't changed others? If/when the shit hits the fan and people come to you for advice, will you think it a fluke, or a result of your personal efforts?
I still remember the admonition: "Do the right thing, even when no one is watching." Do you feel no satisfaction and contentment in doing the right thing even when (supposedly) no one was watching? They were watching, pjd. They're still watching. We're all watching each other while waiting for someone to do the right thing.
You are to be commended for doing the right thing. You have already changed me.
Keep riding your scooter. Fuck em! And viva Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution. We need one in this country. Give the corporations back to the public!
"Got to realize that we are one people" -Peter Tosh
Derrick Jensen can't see the forest for the trees. Change happens from the bottom and gradually works it's way upward until it replaces the existing culture. Political culture is not exempt, it too changes.
Non-violent change is the most effective form of change. People who live more simply in a non-consumerist manner and who live within sustainable boundaries are making powerful changes. Let us not forget that those new economic lifeways are accompanied by changes in values. The values of cooperation instead of competition binds us together into communities. Communities are bound together by common interests and values. This movement is not an individual movement but a mass movement of individuals within a communitarian context focused on non-violent change. IT IS WORKING !
The fact that this article was written indicates that it is working. The Corporatists now realize that they are threatened and are reacting. If we react in other than quiet non-violent patient ways then they win because they will react with their propaganda machine and their public control of the media and their private armies. All of this leads to Fascism.
Quiet patient change will transform the government because it denies the lifeblood of corporations, money. Corporate abuse will be lessened and eventually ended. Their influence on Government will therefore be greatly reduced or ended too. It is at this tipping point that peoples votes will begin to count again and reflect the lifeways of the new economy. Rejoice as the old system crumbles and is transformed by thoughtful caring people.
Love lies bleeding...
...idle rhetoric for idle minds, passing away the time.
Time, time, time.
nedlud........excellent.....excellent indeed!
Fantasy. And the problems at hand can't wait for a hypothetical, patient upwelling of slow living. Most people are captive to the media and consumer culture and won't participate in sufficiently large numbers to have a sufficiently strong effect. There won't be a tipping point in this.
I know, I know, it sounds correct and righteous to act in the ways you propose, and I wish we had a world where gentleness and virtuous personal example really could effect mass change. Some people are inspired by leaders like Gandhi. Remember, Gandhi's effectiveness really came from the mobilization of action he accomplished, rallying large numbers of people to stand in direct opposition to an existing system, often quite forcefully despite the label "non-violent". Large crowds of disgruntled people on the move and breaking the rules are a direct form of defiance. His spinning wheel didn't throw off the British.
Very true - and some of the most effective actions were ones that Gandhi refused to endorse, like various strikes by socialist worker organizations and the 1946 Indian sailor's strikes.
Gandhi's anti-materialist spirituality revolved around poverty being a holy thing and so the Indian poor and Dalits should quietly accept their lot of squalidness and suffering because if it's spiritual merit. But at the same time, he didn't ever ask the Indian rich to change their lives and he was against any kind of wealth redistribution because it was materialistc Marxism, which he disliked.
"But at the same time, he didn't ever ask the Indian rich to change their lives and he was against any kind of wealth redistribution because it was materialistc Marxism, which he disliked."
That's interesting but if he didn't care about money but about happiness, I could see how his vision might have been flawed. However, he still had the courage to fight for India's basic independence and his efforts even lead to empowering more women who otherwise conceded to possible cruelty, abuse, and general enslavement.
yohocoma, Gandhi's spinning wheel may not have thrown off the British, but it did *throw on* the Indians. He set an example for millions to follow in making his own clothes. If he dressed in fine British cloth, then his campaign would have been ineffectual. He would have been considered a hypocrite.
Spinning his own cloth and making his own salt were probably Gandhi's most effective campaigns. I can't think of anything he did in his lifetime that had a greater impact.
Gandhi also set a wonderful example for all of us to follow by creating and living in ashrams. They are in essence the perfect model of self-sustaining, permaculture, intentional community. If the whole world lived in that way, the majority of our problems would simply not exist.
Following Gandhi's lifestyle example would alleviate much suffering while producing great happiness.
"The Corporatists" I wonder whom it is your are speaking of. Who is a "Corporatist" and who of us then falls into that category? I feel I am a "Corporatist" by my understanding of the idea. But let me be seen as a soul first a human, a woman, mother, daughter, sister, a creature of the earth. We need to remember that titles like Corporate, or King, or Leader are very transparent words under which crouch a soul just like yours and mine. Some father, brother, son, child, sits there with a beating heart. They rely us us to believe foremost in their mantle of imaginary power, when any of us in a state of returned power can see they have no clothes.
"The biggest man to hit the scene was once a baby" -Bob Marley
"Inside every mans chest, there beats a heart" -(also) Bob Marley
Corporations have no soul. Corporations own the Government and have rendered us mere consumers, not citizens. If you work for a corporation, quit now! Many of us have done so and paid an economic price. That is a small price to pay for liberty and for the preservation of the Earth. It is better to quit now than to be forced out later. If you have a soul, why would you work for a soulless corporation? Economic well being is an insufficient answer.
If I have a soul and I do, and I work for a corporation....does the corporation then have a soul as well? Who does not have a soul? If all have a soul how can a corporation not have one?
Stone - Your CD handle is appropriate... but could be improved by adding an "r".
You are purely delusional if you think this bottom up method is the solution. It's as if you were to tell the revolutionaries of France to forgo their "cake" and just eat the young grass shoots available in the Spring. If you are unwilling to fight for your ideals you will be perpetually waiting for the new shoots of Spring.
Klaatu, you are not just disagreeing with me but with futurists who understand the importance of decentralization in the modern world. It is a common understanding that change is a bottom up process. Also, I do practice stone medicine so you can refer to me as a stoner without offense.
"Change happens from the bottom and gradually works it's way upward until it replaces the existing culture. Political culture is not exempt, it too changes."
But we're Americans and we want it now!
Many of the above postings hold their degree of truth, but Derrick Jensen addresses the core root problem. It is capitalism, the blind greed of corporate capitalism that invites and dictates ever increasing economic growth.
Think of all the faith humankind has placed upon the advances of technology and economic growth since the building of the Egyptian pyramids, and we are still "the planet of the apes".
It is time all of humankind recognizes that it is materialism and economic growth that is destroying the world.
Materialistic corporate capitalism destroys the spiritual nature of humankind. Spirituality provides the human capacity for compassion and self reflection. Spirituality is the foundation for understanding where we are and where we should be going as a species.
Human society is now at a vital crossroad between choosing to rule by way of the material or the spiritual. And I might add, more and more democracy is the only answer, because true democracy is an exercise of the human spirit.
Stephen, excellent analysis of capitalism. For a second there I thought you were attacking capitalism entirely but I realized that you are smart like Naomi Klein to know where to draw the line on capitalism when it has become misused and degraded by exploiting its weaknesses. I always had a mixed view of capitalism and often wondered whether capitalism alone was the problem. Naomi Klein's "Shock Doctrine" is a real eye opener and should seriously be considered required reading in progressive/liberal/moderate circles. Even conservatives who are sick and tired of getting ripped off should be kind and give her book a read. Very few authors have the courage to discuss and distinguish between good capitalism and fudged capitalism.
My simplistic (and admittedly uninformed, having never read anything really marxist or anticapitalist) view on capitalism: profits on junk people want, fine. Profits on things people need to survive and enjoy a real life, hell no.
"profits on junk people want, fine. Profits on things people need to survive and enjoy a real life, hell no."
I agree.
Jennifer, I always love your writing, but I wish to say this.
Capitalism remains the core the problem. Everything Karl Marx has said that was bad about capitalism has come true including the globalization of capital and corporate power. That does not mean that capitalism has not driven great gains in technological advances for humanity.
The vision of Karl Marx was mystical in a prophetic sense. What Karl Marx overlooked was the power of democracy to contain the greed of capitalism. With the downfall of Communism, Western Capitalism has now turned its attention to destroying the only remaining oppositional force to the greed of Capitalism, civic democracy.
Regarding the powerful dynamics of spirituality that are essential for radical social change, it has been said of Lenin that if he had to do it all over again, he would have sought out ten Saint Francis of Assisi.
One more thing, living simply is truly the first spiritual step in opposing the system.
Stephen V. Riley, I know you are smart as freaking hell so I tread carefully, and with sincerity when I ask, Did not Marx say communism would evolve after the Revolution of an Industrial Capitalist economy, like the dying US's? As opposed to saying communism would evolve after the revolutions of agrarian/non-industrial economies like Russia in 1917 or the PRC?
That was a hijacking of Marx, "saying," they were communist economies not young capitalist industrial economies as Marx dictated. He was right. Look at them. Billionaires in China, my daughter's i-pod made there....Russia has more casino's than Vegas, they are class societies. a la marx
So SVR, when you said, "the downfall of Communism," you confuse me....not Communism according to Karl Marx. Thanks for any thoughts, if you just meant the ripped off name, I understand. most respect most erudite one, peace-out!
Azjoe: Thank you for you excellent comments. I do not contend to be a scholar on Marxism and you appear far better read on this subject. Also, my use of the term, "downfall of communism" was certainly misleading. What I should have said is, "the collapse of the Soviet Union".
To the American mind, the collapse of the Soviet Union made capitalism appear as triumphant and God's work. Thus it opened the door for the Neocons and free marketeers to advance their Project for the New American Century. Up to then, the fear of Communism and the power of the labor movement kept the Western capitalists honest, which now makes democratic activism all that more important. This is the point I believe Derrick Jensen is trying to make, political democratic activism trumps simple green living as the major realistic force to rectify an unsustainable culture of corporate consunerism.
Thanks SVR, hey, wanna hear a bit of PNAC trivia? The exact same individual that wrote the bombshell sentence, "We need a new Pearl harbor,"....drumroll please....was on the 9-11 Commission investigating the new Pearl Harbor.
One has an incident contained when the invesigator is the perpetrator.
Ok, so it won't look like it makes a difference but at least we can feel proud for trying. I think that we all need to take a variety of venues and not give up on any one of them.
The author is right to point out that blaming the individuals too much is often demeaning. It's like a parent overpunishing his or her child. What happens to the child when he or she grows up? The child is brainwashed into thinking that doing good on their part gets them punished so they turn to doing wrong.
Having said that, we not only need to be proud of doing our part but we need to remind each other kindly and give credit where it's due. Sioux Rose nailed it straight when she discussed the destructive nature of people going too far into SELF in a society where Mars rules. I may be overcoming lack of confidence but unfortunately, not everyone is fortunate. As one who has been studying ways to overcome lack of confidence, I realize that part of the solution is giving credit to those around you who do their part where it's due. Scarcity may be what it takes for some in society to finally come together and cooperate as Sioux Rose points out. However, I'm with Moondoggy on striving for positivity no matter the odds.
People may laugh and sneer at us for doing our individual part but it's time those of us who did are part make it clear that we're proud of it and convince our friends, families, etc ... they they too can be proud of doing their part and don't worry. We won't bite.
To Mr. Derrick Jensen:
You are FUCKING GODDAMN RIGHT. I see so many people on here, on CD, and everywhere, who, though they are good in some minor ways (and talk a lot), are utter cowards and can't really DO, anything.
Cowards. Cowards. Cowards.
On the other hand: Brave souls? I salute you!
GUT CHECK.
yup,
How many who peck away at their keyboards here have actually participated in a mass demonstration or a direct action? Most never leave their suburban or exurban homes except to get even further away from people.
I was going to be at the coal plant blockade in DC at the beginning of March with all my friends from college, but I got food poisoning the day before, ugh. It was also a huge lobbying day.
I never participate in mass anything and I'll never talk about any direct actions I've done or not done. I agree with the rest of your post. :)
as long as we suffer the artificial division of the planet, and the sale of the ownership of the pieces of the planet, only people with money can live on it...and even then, only where they have paid to live...freedom of movement is illusory, unless one is homeless...ownership of property supports capitalism...capitalism cannot exist without ownership of property...no matter what our positions on other issues, we studiously avoid discussing our residences...how we pay for them...we are locked into a system upon which our homes, places of sleeping and recreating and stuff-stashing and eating and shitting and bathing and copulating, utterly depend...we will not move forward without a change in the way we house ourselves, and the ways in which we acquire our water and food...there is no way to change these things, in my opinion, but through conflict...the people must come together to defend themselves against the forces of the bankers...I don't see how we will still be living in the same house, or in the same way, a few years from now, as the economy cannot continue without planetary devastation, and our housing structure depends on the money resulting from economic activity...we must live without jobs...jobs kill the planet...
Dubet, I'm not sure you'll check back here - as it's buried so deep. Anyway, my own thoughts about ownership of property? Well, that's going to stay...but people might change...eventually...starting in pockets...of communes...But these communes will be voluntarily formed, based on love and care...only then they can be sustained. To be completely without any ownership? It's possible - but again, it has to happen naturally - perhaps starting with lots of individuals here and there...And there could be a transition through what Gandhi called "trusteeship". I don't think you're saying we should return to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle - so there will have to be cities and towns and villages...but without the strong attachment to property. Owners? No. Trustees? Yes. It could happen...in the future...Just don't be impatient enough to see it in your lifetime...:)
Good article by Derrick Jensen.
I would only add that there are ways of living respectful of the earth that are beyond the consumer paradigm, but they are part of a way of life, living an existence of principles and natural connections. They help build the strata of post-consumer society, but they are not political or social solutions in the context of consumer culture. To think of them as such is dangerous and foolish as Jensen points out... (Anything that corporate power can afford to write off is not part of the solution, nor is anything that perpetuates the view of humans as primarily consumers or non-consumers. )
When your endpoint is forcing others to your will, you are not separate from the problem, you are the problem. The field of personal change has not even been scratched yet, especially when it comes to changing one's beliefs and one's mind and healing one's soul and thus the planet earth. To believe that what we are doing so far on the personal level is the "problem" and not the solution is to abandon the crop because you cannot yet see the tender sprout about to burst forth from the apparently barren ground.
The problem is nothing but personal and individual and the consequence is in fact historical. The will to enact today's solutions cannot be found anywhere in the fading pages of history, because history in and of it's self is but a waste byproduct of the problem.
The experience of individual powerlessness and the projection of perceived "power" beyond one's self be it to a "God" in the heavens, or "Corporations" in the skyscrapers is a byproduct of an evolving consciousness. Both expressions of the same old cure to perceived problems that our ancestors did not and that we today are still struggling to understand.
As Corporations become our new Gods and we struggle to either worship or defy them, we trap ourselves again to the past, to ignorance, and our souls beat wings in vain against the glass cages of our ignorance.
Individual change which includes the daunting task of taking one's personal power back from the imaginary heavens and back from the skyscrapers where powers appear to be secure until Septembers bring their fall, is a daunting task.
Indeed it is in ways easy to "to confront and take down those systems." otherwise known as war, but to promote and build up ones inner systems of power, a daunting task that only rewards the laborer finally in the peace and glory of personal power returned.
We have options, to re-entrench ourselves in confrontation and take downs of that which is not to our liking and see what seeds then are planted and how they grow. Or to grow by planting seeds in our gardens of Eden to see what then happens to the systems we perceived beyond our personal control.
I feel this writer stopping in his climb to understanding, stopping in labored breath and cursing the way and looking back upon the long trail up, and wishing he could go back down, back to the time when gods and men ruled the world and war was the only way. We can see that his path back down is partly obscured in the mists of time and the only way now is up. The will to begin our next human uprising will only be found within self where personal power is also obscured but never lost because it is not in our past, it is inside of us.
Let any of us who can continue, continue up, even as this fellow journeyman grasps our hands and points back down, let us gently smile at him and continue on our journey and return to ourselves, our inner power, our gardens at the end of time.
You had me stumped there on the next to the last paragraph. I don't think Jenson is cursing or wishing that he could go back to the world of Mars and Mammon. What I think he's trying to imply is that for all that we do on our part, there needs to be unity and praise for one another on each of their efforts so that more people will keep it up and additional people will be motivated to join the movement. This issue can be tricky but I think we have to not give up our grips and get others to join. Sioux Rose and Stephen Riley explain this better on this thread as each of them discuss greed and materialism that has infected society.
Part of what I learned as I have been reading books on overcoming hidden unhappiness in life and regaining confidence was finding a way to balance one's needs with those of others. Being too selfish or too selfless can only lead to unhappiness in the long run. Same with too much vs too little confidence.
Jennifer......this is what you see, not what Jensen see's, and I am very clear on what you see, you are a beautiful enlightening soul. Keep going......keep being that light.
Leea
Sioux Rose
LEEA: I do not think you are positioned to know what Jensen means. The length of this thread articulates a lot of interpretations. It's rather arrogant for you to presume YOU can speak for Jensen. I did not take anything remotely like your conclusion/impressions from this author's writing. We all project, friend. Often what we note in someone else is an aspect of ourselves, sometimes an influence that has been dis-owned. Consider that. And please, the apostrophe is used with possessive pronouns or conjunctions. "see's" is NOT a word!
Ms. Rose,
Take it easy on Leea. she is most likely a young adult and grew up in the Reagan Era when unfettered capitalism really started taking off. I understand that her post may sound somewhat individualist but if you consider what has been trapping the young minds these past 3 decades, Leea has been remarkable at overcoming the bad side of individualism and using the concept of individualism in a positive way. I think she fears that collective thinking might appear to threaten her freedom to think. I understand that young rebellious feeling we all have as we reach adult hood. I know you mean well and are very wise but please don't take it too hard on Leea. Earlier, you discussed about the need to be both personally responsible and for public cooperation to exist. I think you can help Leea connect her ideas to public cooperation because when individualism is used for constructive purposes, the chances of cooperating with others and sharing are better than when one uses individualism selfishly.
You have peered right into my very life Dennis, this is very great of you.
I thank you humbly.
What is generally called 'individuality' is really nothing of the sort; it is imitation, something acquired after birth and molded in accordance with whatever society we are a part of. It is Essence that is 'authentic' and timeless within us, and this we are born with. Essence includes tendency, and unfortunately can be corrupted. When and IF essence becomes stronger than the acquired 'personality,' then a new kind of individuality is born, one that is integrated with the whole of being, and completely different from that kind which seeks only its petty ends.
chessgames56, I know what you mean.
Beautifully touching chessgames56....truly. That word Essence and the truth it brings is the way. :)
Thank you Leea. :-) I am eternally grateful to Guy Finley for his many beautiful talks. In talk #1 of his 15-part series "Education of the Soul," Guy discusses essence and its relationship to being. For this series and lots of other free talks check out:
http://www.guyfinley.com
Oh yeah, thanks chessgames56! Guy is just down the road from me....an hour or so.....and I did read his stuff intently a few years back, glad to have the reminder. :)
Wow, lucky you. I'm all the way over on the 'right' coast (ha, ha).
Sioux Rose, you know I love you and your passion and you are perfectly right, how could you be wrong? Keep it up, great sister of the brilliant stars. :)
Brilliant Leea. Right on sister! I love this post. And it's great to see you and Jennifer and Sioux all chatting it up. You're my 3 favorite wise wimmin on CD! I humbly bow before you three in gratitude and reverence. Namaste and bliss-blessings. ~Moondoggy
I agree with your sentiments and share in their lightful joy.
Thanks Mr. Moonman
Exactly Leea! Changing beliefs or ideals is NOT the same as a change in consciousness, which can only come with increasing awareness and wider perception. Authentic transformation is so rare that it is often not recognized or overlooked--even condemned. And the tendency is not to want to see the darkness in oneself, but to blame and condemn others for THEIR darkness. That's what Christ was pointing to when he spoke of the 'mote' and 'beam.' Some here wrote about the New Age movement. The problem with the New Age philosophy is that tries to integrate the selfishness of ego with a transcendent nature and broader awareness, and the two are completely incompatible. Genuine love and fear cannot coexist, neither will broader consciousness compete with that which is selfish and self-limiting.
Yes, Yes, Yes into eternity chessgames56. Your shining spirit and brilliant mind goes on forever.